airstrikes. what is the difference? in other words, i think you wrote in your testimony, sorry about that here for your oral testimony that there are civilian casualties when we do demand airstrikes. is there a qualitative difference? anyone who wants to answer that. >> senator frank and from a discus at the heart. once you've answered the question that is legal to do is strike when you're then select in the platform, a remotely piloted aircraft gives you better precision with a small war hide persistence overhead

with the ability to abort at the last met with the whole chain of commanders watching who are not getting shot at. once you've decided to conduct a strike, the rpa provide unprecedented persistence and oversight. when we are using ground forces, special operations come artillery, fighter aircraft, you do not have the same level of oversight. you often have individuals on the ground talking with aircraft overhead with their buddies been shot up in the perspective is skewed so you make decisions in the heat of the battle. we do that with great distinction as well. we talk about counterterrorism operations and having to choose the platform, oftentimes places don't have american forces and we have to decide whether we want to risk american forces to go when on the ground or in the air. the rpa's give us the capability

to were not risking american forces. so this does provide greater legality and persistent inability to abort and other assets. >> just some comment in that action yet the key point in my written testimony is what matters is not whether we doing the drone orie bob for a sword or dagger but not what matters from the point of view. what matters is whether were choosing the right target. if we've chosen the right target were entitled to use all appropriate weapons and i think it would be a mistake to ban a particular technology given this case is sometimes more accurate and discriminating other alternatives. >> mr. al-muslimi raised his

hand. i noticed the tidbits that this new type of warfare and mr. bergen has spokane to the number of countries they are in, is it a different blowback? is very different reaction because of the nature of aquatics >> the main difference in al qaeda of yemenis in the world that the united states. it's a world of mistakes. the last mistake you make, the more you bought. you are also neglecting a simple fact, which is you actually can capture this person. you could have captured the big low back and the power has word

is not not that much. it's how much it has in the ground and circumvents more yemenis in the world united states. the trent three approved the aid know what it is and i think that is the main low back at the ground forces, especially ground forces can capture essentially and have information from that. >> thank you for that chilling perspective. >> it is my understanding senator grassley will have a chance to ask. >> first of all, a statement in the record. professor 76, i'm going to go to a question instead of its lead-in because of a follow-up on the discussion you had with senator cruz.

is the current trend for broad enough to encompass targeted strikes ordered by a president or president obama or should congress broaden the aumf for strikes to continue? >> so without knowing the full details of the targeted strikes that have been done, it's hard to say which can't be covered though i suspect based on the public record this summer questionable. congress should try to amend the aumf to define what groups they can target if we want to target some groups that are covered, but ideally what we want is an ability to organized groups waging war but at the same time not give the president a blank check to target what groups hear someone else in the administration might consider might be a good idea in a warlike posture against it. i don't think you should

completely repeal the aumf but revisiting a clarification is desirable. >> do think it provides targeted strikes out lines upon that law? >> it depends what strikes were talking about. strikes a deal with imminent threats to define relatively narrowly could be justified as defense against attack. beyond that, one cannot what strikes against groups not covered by the aumf in the way we've seen on the public record. >> i didn't direct this to you, colonel mcsally, but what is your view on the constitution versus absent alliance on the aumf? >> sir, i am not a legal expert, but article ii of the

constitution, that clearly is authorization of itself. where aumf comes in as many don't have the three criteria, but you have al qaeda, al qaeda leaders and affiliate specifically designated to the intelligence process in order to allow them to be legitimate targets. speaking broadly and in my work in africa on which has the highest level of scrutiny, it was a very high level in order to make the case individuals or organizations that the criteria. those discussions were at the highest levels before and it was approved. >> the next question for professor brooks and somin. yuko suggested one of the problems with the procedure is oversight is typically are

determines how they do so and how much evidence they might need. one solution some have raised the court to review stargaze prior to drone strikes in the court that reviews foreign intelligence operations. critics of the proposal note that court the not experts in warfare. are there, racist separation of concerns. do you think a special couriers to provide the targeted killing program? and not they follow up. with such a court be constitutional? >> sorry, i had a little trouble with mike here. embrace it would be constitutional and most agree

there can be legitimate questions about how such a court would be set up and how it would be rad and some scholars in my written testimony had discussed his. i think the issue of not being expert enough can be overcome by appointing lawyers and others to do in fact have a background in relevant military issues. there's always the danger of false comfort or complacency that such an institution provide an outside check on executive discretion can prevent the most serious abuses that possibly arise. nothing can solve problems completely, but our goal should be to minimize and reduce them relative to what might otherwise occur. >> senator, i agree one could devise such a court that would pass constitutional muster. many of the issues that would approve in advance targeting

decisions could be eliminated by focusing on a court that if congress were to create a statutory cause of action for damages for those injured or killed in abuse of our mistake in drone strikes they could review after-the-fact which might eliminate problems associated with judges in advance, but create a mechanism that would keep the executive branch as honest as it is already and will continue to be in two administrations to come. there is no inherent reason also such a court would need to opt worried in the extreme degree of secrecy we've seen. there's no inherent reason you couldn't have classified portions in something like that is not the only potential solution to the oversight and accountability, would certainly be one of the approaches that would go a long way towards reassuring the world more

generally that our policies are in compliance with rule of law norms. >> the last question with professor somin. in your seen it coming identified two key issues with the approach. first, who decides who should be targeted at how much proof they need. indeed, we have seen the administrations sharing with the american people to questions. first, do you think it would be beneficial to disclose its current targeting procedures so people know how officials determine who to kill during targeted drone strikes and what would be the proper burden of proof? >> those are both good questions. like many other panelists, i

agree the legal basis and criteria used are obviously consistent with not disclosing classified intelligence and sources and the like. in terms of what the burden of proof should be, i'm not sure i have a clear opinion on the exact precise standard, realistically beyond a reasonable doubt standard in criminal cases in the nature of war probably doesn't allow proof to that high-level, but should be more than minimal level of earth. some scholars have proposed various dinners at groove and we should aim for a standard that is realistic and more that provides us a substantial degree of confidence that we are not targeting recklessly and have at least substantial and extensive intelligence back in the

decision. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator blumenthal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you for holding this hearing and a ranking member as well. i think we are wrestling with profound questions and wrestling on a bipartisan a safe as you seem because her struggle with issues of conscience and conviction and morality, not to mention the profound foreign policy implication that may be involved and i want to thank mr. al-muslimi for giving us insight into channeling on tenant consequences of possible mistakes in this area and i have

to assume they were unintended consequences because we have that faith in the government tensions of our military and the decision-makers who are guiding this process. stepping back for a moment, one question is whether the rules applicable to drones and bearing the title of this hearing colgan unmanned aerial vehicles a remotely piloted aircraft, whatever they are called, whether those rules should be fundamentally different than they are for any targeted strike because as you pointed out, when the decision is made to do a targeted strike, assuming the

decision is justified by imminent threat for all the other criteria, then we have a set of tactical weaponry at our disposal. there may be boots on the ground, fighter aircraft, cruise missiles or artillery. very often, remotely piloted aircraft are more precise, quicker and more reliable with less cost in terms of collateral damage and potential to to our own troops. the question on my mind issued the rules be this new form of weaponry. the rules are different for nuclear strikes in some sense are developing rules for cyberwarfare as general cartwright has made the point

very out and powerfully. let me begin, colonel mcsally and then perhaps you general carp right, knowing the nuts and bolts of this weaponry, should the rules be any different for remotely piloted aircraft from a term which i agree were actually inaccurately describes the other targeted strikes. >> thank you, senator. i think the answer is no. it is simply a tool to meet our object is once we decided we want to meet those and it's legal to make the subject is. the discussion there might be after world war i when trying to make the case we could take out naval ships with air. we thought that was ridiculous and had to make the case and there is thanks the new tool of

airpower to me a check is eventually got to the point where comfortable using air power and circumstances first ground forces. this is a similar transformation. this discussion and debate is worth having and where we need to have focus is the transparency and legal argument and justification for counterterrorism strategy for you simply go force and focus it they are and keep these vehicle discussions remotely piloted aircraft as a tool that we are using that as an asymmetrical advantage if we are in a fight, it's okay to have an advantage. you don't have to risk american lives to make your object. so why would we wouldn't have the capability to do in a way that is cheaper, more persistent unless mr. american life. bush should not be different on the discussion is worthy.

i will also say from a military process, there are two elements that go through. one is how do we approve an individual to be an improved target? the second process is like to go through to get approval to strike and conduct the straight? this is where we need to focus the discussion. this process you could raise or lower the bar ever be heading higher level or lower level. but there's a lot of precision and skirt and we need to focus on this first part. >> i do agree. one of the opportunities for remotely piloted aircraft offer us is our decision, therefore a better opportunity to be sure. there are more eyes on the issue and environment where they make

decisions. it offers opportunity we have taken advantage of. conversely, anyone familiar with the history of war and those abuses and use of aircraft bombing, carpet bombing, involving unintended damage or perhaps intended damage is endemic to the history of warfare and sometimes used by enemies and unfortunately is used by the united states. so we are dealing with a set of questions that has persisted for some time. let me focus to you, colonel mcsally because mr. al-muslimi raises a legitimate issue that somehow there is the appearance, the perception of greater damage

and possible missed dates associated with this weaponry, this tool. is that a fair criticism? >> i can't speak specifically about operations in this country, but i can see the capability does exist to make sure we minimize civilian casualties in the process i'm familiar with is one where he made a high-level identification once a target is approved and they met the criteria and geographic location with a variety of sources. again, we have high confidence we've done a thorough collateral damage assessment, which is a detailed process we go through. i encourage you all to get the briefing on that process and how we do that and to make sure we

do not have on tenant of the casualties. we do have the process available in the case is so eloquently been sharing of the impacts of strikes going on in the country, we need to look at the skirt me of who is on that list and make sure operators have the appropriate bar of positive identification and geographic location and the collateral damage assessment. this testimony shows the unintended consequences are severe. >> as the chairman allows it, if mr. al-muslimi has any comments. >> thank you. one of the things i need the most is to say the senate list. a lot of the mistakes also this because i do not know if this person is a target or not.

that is made a lot of mistakes in a lot of killings have been happening because people do not know it was try to be arrested. another issue has blowback us here in the u.s. for them. a few ap. i met a man who says in the past the children go to sleep or i will call your father. now they say go to sleep or i will call the blade. that is shifted whole conversation. it's not just any qualitative blowback of this specific example, but it is making it look like another country like iran and much more than you can

imagine. >> senator, real quick, i worry here. what we've seen and so we need to look at that end of the process and whatever process we need to ensure the intelligence drives the target name is also part of the scrutiny. if we miss that, we rely as you suggest on the drone. >> senator graham. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to say for the record no system is perfect, but i want to applaud the obama administration. i think an aggressive and responsible use of the program where we don't have ground forces or a whole lot of control to make the rest of essays.

i don't get to see many good things about president obama in south carolina. but i think he is serious. i think he's full and takes the responsibility when it comes to targeting people in a commander-in-chief type way. general cartwright, when you ordered into battle by your commander-in-chief, do you obey your orders? >> i do. we are going to give the commander-in-chief the ability to order citizens into battle, but they don't get to go to court. i think that is a decision. i want a judge to say you shouldn't know.

there is nothing more basic to being commander-in-chief and being able to order people into battle and suppress the enemies of this nation. if you want to talk about transparency, count me in. if you're a congress more in how the system works, if you're contemplating converting the power and the commander-in-chief with unelected judges did make wartime decisions, count me out. that would be a breathtaking overstepping and quite frankly unfair because of the situation they say we don't think you're quite rare. the problem usher in person one would be out raised in the court can defend itself. here is for elected officials have been understanding.

count me out for basically turning the warrant to a crime. the preemption, do you think that this solid dark turn in the war on terror? is the theory basically when it comes to al qaeda and taliban is better to hit them before they hit you. >> if you look at the vic dems overwhelmingly if the taliban. it is a pose an? >> let's talk about that. general cartwright coming year in afghanistan. do you have to wait them out before he shoots him quick >> it's a scenario of hostility.

>> mr. bergen, that's the point. once your designated an enemy, we don't have to make it a fair fight, but i have to wake you up. we are going to shoot you. don't become part of the enemy. here's the problem, how do we know if you're part of the enemy? what i'm suggesting is a back cause i'm the considerable were trying to accomplish. what's your name again commissary? i don't want to miss pronounce your name. >> al-muslimi. >> okay. as a country of great turmoil, do a great? great conflict? >> it definitely has lots of com clicks. >> i understand that. dear the pakistani government to arrest in modern? >> it is rejected.

>> can you imagine if it came out in the public who told the pakistani government aligns over here and got away. the reason president obama didn't do that is you can't trust the pakistan government to go after bin laden. to your country, there's places in our country i wouldn't tell anybody about what were up to and the person we are trying to capture are killed would wind up knowing about it. nothing would be pleased more to interrogate in the world we live in is if you share this information, you'll wind up tipping off the people we try to go after. do you agree with?

>> in some cases, absolutely, sir. i want to put when president obama shoes for a moment. what do you share and who do you share with? who he pulled the trigger on? all i can say is he above all others in the next person to occupy the office needs to have a reasonable amount of deference but not unchecked power. we have one commander-in-chief. we can't have 535 commander-in-chief spirit is a mr. chairman, i'm glad we are having this debate. when it comes to the law of war, is a fundamentally different than criminal law? >> yes, it is. >> okay, the purpose is to win the war, to nature as the enemy, to gather intelligence.

it is to solve a crime, bring people to justice, give them a chance to be acquitted or convicted in a fundamentally different. you agree with? >> absolutely. >> yes. >> the gold is the difference after inviting a more endocrine. there is no air force to shoot down. there is no need be to think and transforming it out. we need to look at the trend for a new. we need to broaden the ability because a changing day by day. i would end with this thought. please don't mistake my deal for her defending the country that i know have values. don't torture the detainees.

when you capture someone, we don't cut off their heads. we give them a lawyer. that makes us better, not weaker. count me for fighting the values. the reason i don't want to torture anyone is because that not a word about and it hurts us more than helps us. having said that, i understand the difference between fighting a war and fighting a crime and i will work with my colleagues in any way possible to make sure we make the least amount of mistakes as a nation. the one mistake i will not tolerate is the mistake of believing we are not at war. the next senator leave. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thanks to all of you for joining us today. in her testimony, you note that critics said the

administration's flypaper on this issue focus on weaknesses of the requirements outlined in that white paper that under the memo's analysis before u.s. citizen may be lawfully targeted. because those requirements apply only when it is an operational leader or the memo's weakness is may be mitigated. stayed a senior al qaeda leader likely qualifies as a legitimate target, even when he does not pose an imminent threat. the real difficulty lies in determining whether somebody is there is not a terrorist leader. this put aside an interesting spot. the constitutional system

requires that to court a degree of due process are you a citizen before the u.s. citizen is deprived of liberty or property are most importantly, my. do you tend to agree it is essential we have in place some kind of procedures that are not deprived of the laziness and send, some kind of adequate procedure for determining whether someone is a terrorist leader quiets >> yes, i do agree that is the central issue i've posted my testimony some of the other witnesses have as well. if someone is a terrorist leader, the group, even if they're not an imminent riot, sleeping in their beds, osama bin laden was asleep and he was targeted, but that didn't make

it an illegitimate attack. at the same time, when he procedures to ensure citizens we are choosing the right people. i suggest one mechanism used but obviously there have to be in place procedures within the executive branch itself to try to minimize the risk of error in this respect. we would have procedure and law enforcement, but that doesn't mean the issue should be left up to discussion of the president and subordinates. >> do you have any indication as to how the administration believes it should move forward? how should make the determination that the degree of due process? >> i think the difficult issue is so far the administration hasn't made public, to

procedures, so i joined with many people who have stated more publicity on this is desirable obviously consistent with project and classified intelligence sources and the like. once we know more, we might be in a better position to access other procedures are adequate or not. >> i appreciate that. i want to ask a question that will give each of you an opportunity to answer given the time constraints we face. my question is this. what do you think are the obstacles to providing for some independent review, independent judicial review of the executives determination and is potentially the subject of a vehicle drone strike. when it was start with you,

general? >> there're so many scenarios you could wander your mind through. if you're in a declared area of hostility, the basis of the questions senator graham was asking, you have a set of rules associated with americans that might be in a population targetable people ever be difficult to the court case for each one of them. when you're outside declared area of hostility, you have more leeway to have a discussion. i personally believe how many process on the back side, accountability process that when you it set up rules. they may not overcome the time. were errors made in this case? should do that comes, whether your citizens are not have been afforded more rights? should they be compensated for

the loss? what should have been to address many questions but again many examples we have heard today. rather than putting a court in the middle of a war construct, which would have constitutional issues. i differ. >> thank you. >> professor. >> there are no obstacles in some sense to creating a more fair and transparent system with regard to u.s. citizens they are not wrongly targeted based on misinformation. other reassurances with remotely piloted aircraft to ensure we get the people we target and not innocent there is good as intelligence and despises strategy. the biggest political barrier that stands in the way to ensure

we are targeting the right people on the reliable process and a fair process is a very black-and-white issue of war and crime under completely different systems for different roles. other kinds of groups is something that in many ways more like large-scale organized crime. it has dimensions of both it requires military tools and tools are traditionally associated with intelligence on one source meant. if we can get past that, right now we've got people saying in a war you can do this any save the dawn of a war, you can't do that. but the trouble is we have trouble deciding whether we

should apply the war paradigm for the crime paradigm. >> certainly weren't disputing right fights that go on was to talk about domestic soil, u.s. citizen. >> we need to get more creative of hybrid legal mechanism. >> arafat stayed personal take me well over. do a major risk and not for the rest of the panel? how do i make keepers eight? >> suspend the death penalty in this circumstance. i appreciate that. >> conscious way i would try to be brief. i think there are two obstacles in ensuring a better system that were necessary unintelligence dolby ac. secondly, the >> and should be independent and act reasonably and night at

raises the opportunity to attack the target. these are problems but are not in super bowl. we've overcome to a large extent with the fisa court of the university of utah proposed ways to do it and the government of israel does in fact have a review mechanism further targeted killings in his view is that of other scholars over the years. i'm not saying they could adopt the methods they use. obviously, their situation is different from ours, but despite the difficulty, we can reduce the risk of error and increase the chance of limiting this to a legitimate target without losing the opportunity to attack genuine terrorists still out there certainly. thank you. >> a first effort needs be more transparency in the process we are using in order to identify somebody has an approved target. additional oversight does come

that is decided upon, i would encourage it would be in the area of someone being an approved target, but not an approval to strike because when you get in that second area, sometimes it's moments, hours, days coming years remake criteria. if that happens, it's got to be on the front end to name somebody outside of an area of combat operations. >> limited to the fines they are a terrorist leader. >> authority painful enough to cause a chain of command to whatever level we have to than that of someone having an approved. now you have to have additional approval to strike. many times used the opportunity because too much time goes by

and the target is fleeting. any oversight needs to be on the front end and outside of our combat operations. >> there would be an advantage in having a post back the review of the strikes. there'd be a concrete thing that could come out of this. when they kill civilians, we pay page and to the innocent families. there were civilian casualties that would allow you to make the same kind of payment. after all, if it is war, doesn't matter where that takes place. we have a country have tended to compensate people when we can. >> and with that point, in the last few years, a few ap has been stronger, so it's hard to think of how this came to any

good. to make it less bad, one of the things that's god is issue an apology to his italian and a router a tree into strike has a in compensation to build a house tolar school for every school or hospital. >> thank you read much for your indulgence. >> to the people of yemen now we are there with the approval of the government of yemen? >> it's very hard to speak whether people know or don't know. whether the government approval doesn't approve, espouse a defensive also the capital, bringing a lot of problems and a lot of blowback. it's not an issue whether the government approves it or not. it's this underground that has

been a problem. >> refer the drones, with aqap viewed as a positive force in yemen for a negative force? >> i have never met anyone who looks to aqap is an entity ever. >> general cartwright, we have a divided responsibility when it comes to drones. forgive me, colonel. i lose the reference between the cia and the military. aside from intramural conversation about two different agencies, can you give your opinion to whether this is a necessary thing? >> colonel nick salley will jump in on this, too. my experience, whether it be drones whether weapons systems.

when you connect operations that are nonmilitary, we generally have trouble. people oftentimes get killed that shouldn't have been shot. so if we are going to have the military participate in these operations for an extended period of time, more than a one-off technician, we need to go back to practices associated with reconnaissance, where we have specific units designated and equipped and trained and recruited to do that operation. that is what i would recommend. if you have one air force for logistics reasons, train reasons, it needs to be an air force capable of treating a set of people for a specific mission that was not the same as an area of conflict.

>> i've seen the intelligence gathering taking place. when it is done according to the book, that's what i was told, it's a painstaking elaboration of the site, a person before the decision person has ever made a despite this circumstance is where people are killed, every effort is made to avoid that as americans but insisted it be. it is so important in that process. it's different are better between the cia and military. >> if it is not inside an area of hostility, it is not a

country to declare hostility, the agency has better ability to gather intelligence and the military does. >> one of the things your new america foundation has been involved in his public opinion research about the impact of the train to strikes in pakistan and yemen. could you tell me what you found? >> an independent poll in the tribal area where they have been in and of overwhelming opposition to the drone strikes. if the pakistani military was involved, which are opposition change? the opposition does not quite a lot to the military was not involved. we also found overwhelming opposition to al qaeda and the taliban. we asked if al qaeda and taliban on the ballot, would you vote in

an election for only 1% way. there has been doing some public discontent, it is on the of pakistan, after all april 30th to stop this so you've got this very confusing situation, with the parliament has voted to come and get it so precedes and the f-16s which could theoretically shoot the strong down but don't. some sort of passive consent. >> that is the point i want to go to professor brooks with my last question. what i find different is the definition of battlefield. i know we are voting for in 2001. we were headed there. they would protect the united states an answer that attack. i don't think many members did

that we'd be having this conversation 12 years later a yemen, somalia, even pakistan. maybe i should've been able to discern not, but i didn't. maybe someday. it appears now we have to have passive if not active approval before we are using these aircraft companies unmanned aerial aircraft before we engage the enemy. how does this work into the definition of battlefield in the use of military force? >> not very comfortably. they've got to the go paradigms that don't fit the challenges are faced with right now and maybe to illustrate, you may remember in 1976, orlando will

tellier for former trillion defense minister had been ousted in a military coup ultimately came to the united states and the suspect and against the dictatorship, the trillion military decided in the ongoing but they didn't like that very much so operatives planted a car bomb here in washington d.c., killing him and his american citizen is the same. recall that extra judicial homicide. make there right now with a cousin of the gap between east to the go paradigms in the extreme secrecy and lack of transparency in which these decisions take place, right now if we could imagine the circumstances occurred today, i would assume the trillion military government would say, what is your objection? he is an enemy.

you are unwilling or unable to do anything about it. we had to take matters into our own hands. when we question your assessment he was a combat or in armed would reasonably rip by sr decision to make. my bride will fall concerned is it essentially handed a playbook for abuse to governments around the world that we need to develop some middle ground that acknowledges a situation that is more alike in many ways, the crime like in other ways. i think that is just a question of creativity. one final comment if i may. i really go through the strategic issue. when it comes to the benefits of this policy, perception not as much is reality. while a great night -- the

reality of my colleagues have suggested, the blowback is real, we take into account the cost, that is something we have to consider as much as legal issues. >> just briefly on this issue, the aumf does not contain a geographic limitation. rather, limitation is based on the nation's organizations or persons the president determined planned, authorized or committed terrorist attacks. so it's not limited to afghanistan and allows the president to attack these groups or individuals wherever they might be located. there is an important decision between nations for the government supports these groups was unwilling to do anything about them and there is some reasonable rule of law legally and from a policy is, different measures are appropriate and i

second what others have said there might be cases that is legally or morally appropriate to use lethal force and might not want to do so out of policy considerations, whether blowback or other types of concerned. it does not have a geographic constraint. >> is approved to a 12 year after because al qaeda is progeny would somehow appear. it's a different time and place after 9/11 and now we're looking back at it from a different date. senator cruz. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to ask the question to general cartwright and general mcsally. what is the relative value of killing versus capturing and how

is that it's fast? >> again, i have to sit on the hypothetical here, but there is a progression of a terrorist organization generated that can be stages. one is recruiting and you have an iconic figure in that particular phase, eliminating the figure emanates the movement. when you move in the second stage, that's where you start to build a bench so to speak and if you kill one, another will come behind. the third stage is franchising and they proliferate out and have the ability to generate. after you leave the first stage, separate political consideration , killing the leader has little value because he or she will be replaced. you make it a particularly capable one that takes a while to recover.

general in second and third stages killing the leaders does not eliminate the movement. >> kernel. >> i will speak to the challenges it features a capture mission over a cow mission, but it does depend on circumstances on location weather is more desirable to kill or capture. maybe you want to capture in more circumstances. it does depend on the country we talk about in the location. is that consent or they unwilling or unable when you make that call? would say he then decided we need to do this capture mission. that can be a complex operation per unit special forces. sometimes the intelligence tops at a moments notice. you haven't said enough based on a ship waiting weeks and months unable to do a permission and for intelligence to come

together. if you order them income that they may have to fight their way in and out so there could be extra night civilian casualties if things go wrong. of course the reality have the potential for u.s. casualties are u.s. individuals to be captured in the strategic implications of that. those are the things weighed event your desiring mission, sometimes the bar is way too high and the cost is too high in time and opportunity costs for special capabilities to do the capture >> thank you. mr. bergen. how has in your opinion the obama administration focused on targeted killings effected our ability to gather intelligence and analyze situations in the middle east such as libya or reject? >> it's a very hard question to

answer, but i will make the observation even the people involved didn't know there'd be a successful vacation. the fbi missed the fact that quarter of the seats in parliament will take another cell assess any jet and at the end of the day, the strategic warning to policy makers is ultimately what they should be doing. if the assessment of you and your colleagues that the mission has been deformed more paramilitary organization, that's a problem. >> thank you. now professor somin, do you see any tension between the obama and station are u.s. citizens that are captured eight in al qaeda must be tried in article iii courts in southern military commissions, but nonetheless can be summarily

killed with drone strikes. is that all inconsistent? >> i don't and it's inherently inconsistent that when we consider someone as an enemy can not and if they really are, they can be targeted. once they're captured, the administration could choose a matter of policy to try these individuals in article iii courts as opposed to doing so in military courts, though i don't think would be unconstitutional or illegal to go to military court room. i guess there isn't an inherent contradiction unless the administration says were choosing a matter of policy to try certain enemy combatants in article iii courts, the claiming it is never permissible to try such individuals, which would probably not be correct. >> which you agree on any

analysis or greater potential violation of rights to take their life and to capture and interrogate? >> in many cases that's true, but i don't if it's true categorically that there could be a person who is a legitimate target and can make out in a battlefield, but if capture is still legal limit to interrogate them and torture illegal under domestic and international law. >> sure. let me ask a question of professor somin and professor brooks. there has been some consideration of potential role of a fisa clay-court dealing with designating individuals as terrorist leaders are having some role in drone strikes. it strikes me that senator graham raised serious constitutional question about

the article to roll an appropriate ability of this congress to restrict decisions of the commander-in-chief, direct the military operations against foreign hostile forces. ..

this congress that the authority to make the other guys of regulations that i suggested. obviously, the fact that congress has authority does not mean that congress should always exercise it to its fullest extent. various colors and others have talked about how to strike the right balance an independent review and how that should be done. >> senator, congress also has the power to define and punish offenses against the laws of nations which would be a useful mechanism in this regard. i might add, it is a problem here because clearly we all agree that if there were to be some future president who was insane and to simply asserted that there was a war against some perfectly innocent people, that that justified the use of lethal force. we would wish there to be some mechanism short of impeachment to try to restrain that abuse of power. i think the question is -- i

don't think that the commander in chief power, the fact that the president obviously has a great deal of discretion when it comes to conflict and foreign-policy issues this unnecessarily restrain congress from all over sight. you can certainly design, particularly if you focus on the after the fact review rather than the advanced approval, you can certainly, with relative ease, devise a judicial process that would not pose any of those problems. i would -- the professor mentioned earlier, and that think it is instructive and worth reading for anyone who is not have the time to take a look at the israeli supreme court 2006 decision on target telling. very similar legal system in many ways, and obviously the challenges they faced domestically with regard to terrorism are far greater than those that we face. but that court resoundingly rejected the notion that these decisions were -- the question

of whether a particular body of law applies in the first place to a fixed particular body of facts is precisely the kind of decision that the judiciary and only the judiciary is normally considered to be qualified to make. >> i would like to thank each of the six of you for very illuminating and insightful testimony, no elected think, in particular, the gentleman for traveling a considerable distance and presenting heartfelt and quite powerful testimony. i think the chairman for conducting this hearing. >> thank you, sir. senator. >> thank you very much. i just want to follow up on one issue with the professor. you know that some of the proposed development and oversight, something modeled after the chief -- fisa court that would be tasked with the executive determination about a u.s. citizen being a terrorist leader. some are naturally worried that

such confidential courts operate without any kind of transparency , any kind of review so that much of what they do would be completely immune from any oversight from the public. from any kind of scrutiny, and at the same time others would argue that it necessarily makes a certain degree of sense to do that or you are dealing with so sensitive a determination as to whether or not a particular u.s. citizen is, in fact, a terrorist leader. so, i guess my question is, if congress were to agree with the recommendation to create such backcourt, eight fisa-like court, how would you recommend that it to about the very delicate task of balancing on the one hand the need for a degree of confidentiality in on the other and the need for the public to deal to understand

what is happening on some level. and is there a way that you could, perhaps, separate those two so that you could make them harmonize? >> a very important question. there may not be a way to find a perfect ideal balance, but there are many situations already in the legal system where national security information or evidence that may impinge on somebody's privacy is held in camera by the court and is not publicized, but at the same time, the court's legal reasoning can be publicized, both for review by higher courts and also for consideration by the public and outside experts. so it seems to me that well particular details or factual information or intelligence data to if. the court's legal reasoning does not have to be in the general standard -- there is the

experience of israel in the stardust -- regard as well, so we have models that we could potentially use to at least reduce the tension even if we cannot totally eliminated. >> even if that means possibly bifurcating proceedings are making some aspects of the determination public and other is immune from the transparency. >> yes. that is correct. we cannot have perfect transparency, but the system was somewhat more transparent given the current situation where the decisions are made almost entirely within the executive branch, often with the transparency of all. when it comes to transparency at think that that should not be the enemy of the good. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. special thanks to this panel for your patience. thank you for your sacrifice,

personal sacrifice and coming year. testimony was extremely important to this hearing and we thank you so much for coming in today. thank you. this was a long-anticipated hearing and the first of its kind in the senate. i would sure hope it will be a last. more that will be discussed. a number of groups have submitted testimony that will be entered into the record without objection, including the american civil liberties union, amnesty international, the constitution project, human-rights watch in the open society foundation. without objection allen to the statements into the record, and i want to take a point of personal privilege to acknowledge a person in the audience. sitting in the second row here. currently a deputy federal public defender in los angeles. she returned for this hearing because with a last two years she has been on detail to my office and served as counsel on this constitution subcommittee.

before she left she helped to prepare today's hearing. i hope we did well based on your standards and what you have asked us to consider. she has made many important contributions to our work and including improving coordination by federal, state and local law enforcement and apprehending fugitives and planning the first ever congressional hearings on solitary confinement in the school -to-prison pipeline in the hearings we had previously. thank you so much for your fine work. the hearing record will be held open for one week to accept additional statements. written questions might also be submitted. i ask that they be submitted by close of business one week from today. i'll ask the witnesses to respond in a prompt fashion. there are no further comments from the panel of my colleagues, i think the witnesses for attending, and my colleagues for their participation. hearing stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> up next on c-span2, the new venezuelan president swearing-in followed by consumer financial director, operations and his agency. and later, the massachusetts senate debate between democratic candidates, as say a

administrator testifies before a house appropriations subcommittee on wednesday on the president's 2014 faa budget proposal. the request, or $15 billion provides funding for efforts to modernize the nation's airways. you can see the hearing live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. at today's white house briefing spokesman jay carney took questions on senate minority leader mitch mcconnell criticism on the faa decision to furlough air-traffic control employees and closed airport hours. here is some of what he said. >> i find it fascinating that mitch mcconnell, the senator, the leader of the republican party in the senate is decrying the sequester that he decried in the past and then supported.

this is a result of the sequestered being implemented. we made clear that there would be these kinds of negative effects. if congress fails to take reasonable action to avert the sequester. policy that everyone who was involved in writing it knew at the time. it was never designed to be implemented. it was designed to be bad policy and therefore to be avoided. the fact is if congress had an opportunity. republicans made a choice, and this was the result of a choice that they made to embrace the sequester as -- and i am quoting republicans, a victory for the tea party and a home run. i am not sure if leaders in the republican party in the congress agree with those assessments now because they have obviously change their position on the sequestrate variety of times. the sequester never should have become policy. the president has put forward a comprehensive balanced approach

to deficit reduction that would eliminate the sequestered. but this was congress's responsibility to read it needs to take action. >> a couple of groups, bipartisan groups making proposals. senators saying the administration has the opportunity to prioritize spending. senator blumenthal suggesting that the furloughs ought to be postponed to give congress another chance to revisit sequestration. a couple of other senators, republican and democrat asking the transportation secretary and head of the faa if they might be able to move money around. what is your response? >> it confirms july said. only congress can take action to stop these delays. there are a result of the sequester that republicans

insisted take place. but let's be clear about the actions the faa has taken and the actions it cannot take because of the way the budgets are structured and the way that the law imposing the sequester is written. required by law to cut $1 billion between now and the end of september, $637 million from the faa. the faa has initiated a series of cost-saving measures above personnel and non personnel related including a hiring freeze, restrictions on travel, terminations of certain temporary employees the reductions in contracts. the fact is 70 percent of the operational budget is personnel. there is simply no way to avoid furloughs. the secretary laid this out as

an inevitable consequence of sequester were to become law, implemented, and overtime all of these other measures were implemented and the final action had to be furloughed. now, that's just a fact. the president has proposed a balanced plan to replace the sequester and reduce our deficit while making the investments that are necessary, have our economy grow and create jobs cannot protect the middle-class and seniors. the president is engaged in the process where he is trying to find common ground to see if it exists of republicans. reducing our deficit and a balanced way and as before the plan that would do that and would eliminate the sequester in the process. when it comes to these delays, though, congress passed an act in order to avoid these delays. >> the fact you are not asking for the ability to prioritize spending under the faa suggests

-- >> what i am saying -- >> you want to sequester to inflect -- >> since we did everything we could to avert the sequester and unfortunately republicans decided as a political matter that it was a home-run for them to end like this upon the american people, i think that suggestion just as not hold wrote to buy water. secondly, the faa did take all the action it could under lots of produce the savings and avoid furloughs up until this point where because of the nature of the budget and the personnel had the nature of their operations, furloughs are the only option available to the faa at this time. now, again, if congress wants to address this matter then they should act, but this is something that only by law congress can do. [inaudible question]

cheeks. [inaudible question] >> what can you do at this point to try to reconcile the situation? >> well, a matter of how we resolve our budget, the disagreement that has led to the imposition of the sequestered, the decision by republicans to embrace the sequester and to spend a lot of time insisting that there were no consequences to the sequester and then suddenly when there are consequences that all like to start pointing fingers when, in fact, they have the opportunity to avoid this. our interest in eliminating the sequester, i never should have become law. the president put forward a proposal to eliminate the sequester. when it comes to specific actions that the faa has undertaken to deal with these delays caused by this, those are matters of traffic control and safety. the department of transportation

in general. >> i tell my kids. look, if to cars pull up and one as a stranger and the other car has dick cheney, you get in the car with a stranger. >> i was thinking about this. if you took all the money republicans been trying to stop health care, all the money democrats spent trying to get health care, we could have had health care. it's so amazing to be in washington d.c. with all this history, all this amazing buildings and yet here we are at the hilton. kind of hard to be funny with the president of the united states sitting right next to you. yet somehow day in and day out joe biden manages to do it. [laughter] >> this weekend on c-span the white house correspondents dinner. president obama and late night talk-show host conan o'brien headline the event. our coverage starts with the red carpet arrivals live saturday at 615 eastern on c-span. >> subcommittee testimony

wednesday on the 2014 budget proposal for the army corps of engineers. 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span three. >> this plan -- this past friday at -- friday the venezuelan president, k-9, took the oath of office and was sworn in in a ceremony in the national assembly. tapped by former president hugo chavez before he died to lead the next government narrowly defeated his opponent in the april 14 elections. opposition led protests erupted following the election results after allegations of voting irregularities surfaced. here's a portion. >> representative william o'hare was a vehement member of the opposition. well, the campaign, he brought about some complaints. and then he went back to where

he needed to be. excuse me if i am mentioning your name. he participated in the elections with the opposition. and he had proof about fraud that had taken place against them in a municipality. he lost with less than 1 percent and had proved that he had won the election. well, he went where he had to go. he went to the elections and the courts. and we know that in neighborhoods, he did not mobilize people were set fire to the houses. he just did what he had to do. i just gave that as an example. if there are differences in

terms of elections to results, in this case commission results, there are many mechanisms in place. i must say the first thing the needs to be done in this case is to call for a piece. if one section wants to clarify doubt or challenge the election they can do it. they have mechanisms in place to do it. you have the elections cannot they're completely transparent recognized by the country as well as the rest of the world, how much violence could we have been scared and pain if this had been the behavior, the respect for democracy the people challenging the elections were question them or ask for whenever they wanted.

no. instead, they went out into the streets. democracy, they went out on the streets. the people with this civic attitude in the institutions, we defeated those people. and then a document was submitted to the national elections council on wednesday announcing a march on caracas. we had enough affirmation that this was going to be a renegotiation of the 2002 march. if i am here, you placed me here. commander john has placed me here to reflect the strict the bands of the constitution cannot protect all of the venezuelan people. they are not coming in. they're not marching in. they can march for ross they want. had an impact.

today we don't have to regret the loss of lives or the injured . so we had an effect. i thank god for having been enlightened. when i was about to launch a new center. i was told at that time that the plan was going to be from march on wednesday. i must say, for all the venezuelans that are listening to me, they have not challenged the elections. the elections have not legally been challenged. all of venezuela needs to know. they have not been challenged. they submitted a document that has a whole array of inconsistencies, poorly written, poorly prepared, improvised. the national elections council yesterday rendered a decision.

i was in lima. the heads of state can vouch for this. i found out about the decision that was made, and that said, i respect the national election council. i may have some differences with the decision made, but that is not important. in national elections council made a decision, and i as head of state completely support their decision. they must do what they must do within the framework of the law and the constitution. we must provide all of our institution -- institutional and political support. i'm going to stated here as i said it. whatever the outcome there will never recognize it. there will never recognize it.

only in venezuela because of the fickleness you have a 54% auditing, and that is why it is touching. what do i mean? i mean that when -- once the center is closed, 100 percent of the centers are audited, all of the election centers go through an audit. 54 percent of the polling places never in any part of the world, if we went from the united states to here, in the united states they don't audit a single polling machine. the u.s. supreme court threw a legal recourse submitted by candid al gore. they said there is no recount. the decision is that bush won

everyone said, okay. institutions as guarantors, will we know what happened with that election process. the right, venezuela cannot applauding along with bush. they will not recognize. they have a different plan in mind. we are prepared, i am sure that the nation is firm, sure, strong, awake. the democratic nation is going to impose itself on the intolerance. we have the spirit of inclusion, love, respect. we will impose this against those that wish to sabotage and impose an agenda of violence. i am sure that. i am totally sure of that.

now people are saying it is a lie. those fallen heroes, i would just like to render a tribute to them. he died from the bullets in the state of sucre. i think some of his family members are here. people are now saying this is false. well, here he is. his eyes full of life here. here we see -- and let me just say, his family is here. these crimes, the authorities have already detained the

perpetrators of these criminal acts. the perpetrators, and these are the family members, his widow, his two daughters, the daughters who came out to defend, and he was shot in the back. here, his daughters, his wife, the family is also here. this was part of that urbanism that was launched by president hugo chavez and given to these new dwellings. i said, there is not going to be any impunity. we're going to have justice. people will pay for the crimes that were committed. is only through justice can we

heal hatred and intolerance so that we never see a repetition of these crimes against the poor, against the people. these crimes are the result of racist hatred, social racism. i call on everyone. and those who voted against us, first of all i am the president of the republic of venezuela. i will govern this country or the next few years. i know what i am going to do. i have the tools for it. i was trained by commander hugo chavez to assume responsibilities with honesty, with humility, complex

responsibilities working collectively with the people. as he said on december 8, always working together with the people, always obeying the people democratically. i just would like to look right at the camera, right you. my fellow countrymen who are in their third -- birthplaces, at home, listening to me on the radio, the lessons i have shown, dramatic tolls of violence. i call upon you. i call upon the entire venezuelan people, the men and women who for whatever reason voted against the candidate of the nation and the project of democracy and socialism. i extend my hand. i would like to work with you. i will travel throughout the country. i want a direct dialogue with those people on the streets in

the neighborhoods with the workers, with the businessman, with the middle-class. i want to hear your reasons. i would like to extend my hand. i would like to look you. i would like to embrace you. if you have differences, keep those differences. but if you accept my invitation, come with me. the son of hugo chavez, build the future and nation for your children, my children. we guarantee peace in this country. [applause] we already said it. [applause] we guarantee the peace in this country. only we -- and i say this very humbling end modestly. we, in my case i who am here due

to a historic circumstances that we have experienced, i never aspired to any position throughout my life. i was a labor representative. i was the president of the student centers because the democratic process these elected me to positions. i was a metro bus worker delegate. i come from a labour background, a rebellious background. how many neighborhoods have my travel to to try to train revolutionaries in the 1970's and 80's. i never aspired to be president. i am here due to a historic circumstances. i have fully as soon as the orders of supreme commander. i fully assume the decisions of the people, and now i call on you to put an end to sabotaging the economy, to stop sabotaging

the electrical grid, to stop sabotaging our lives in society. to divide the country. enough of divisions and intolerance and hatred. i call, first of all, on the venezuelan people and the citizens and voters to the men and women on the streets, and i also call on the politicians, the members of the opposition, social democrats, christian democrats, the center, right parties, the center-left parties, if they still resist the opposition. i call upon all of you to discuss in the various scenarios. i am ready to discuss things in a spirit of respect for the support of our economy and human rights. i am willing to discuss, even with the devil, god forgive me. even to make sure that we put an

end to this hatred against me and the people, to put an end to the intolerance against the venezuelan people and the american people, to respect the constitution. all of them -- well, the opposition knows. how many governors do you have? how many representatives in congress? company did you have? how many city councilman, mayors this year we have elections, municipal elections for mayor and councilman. so this dictatorship, the dictatorship of elections, 17 other 18 elections. it leads us to believe that there is a force that supports a spiritual, ideological, political force that brings together all of us. we went through the most challenging elections in 14

years because i am not hugo chavez, to begin with. and i am not hugo chavez, and i have assumed this role as his -- one of the children, as the guarantor of his dreams, the collective dreams, the president once said and told us, separately you are nothing. you would lose out on the dream of a free country. only together can we be hugo chavez, and has said that a thousand times traveling throughout the country. the first time we went to elections was an economic war, and i say this to the analysts, the first analyst, of course, being the people in the neighborhoods and factories. what are the true causes of a drop in the elections, participation in the middle of a

historic and heroic victory. no one can diminish the historic and heroic victory that we enjoyed on april 14th, but objectively -- first of all, we were not with the supreme commander. many people were sad, and there was an effort to depress people. a small percentage of people that refrain from -- we won with 51%. we had one in the past with 55 percent, so we are seeing a drop, 4% drop in voter support. that is significant. what happened with the citizens? why didn't they go out to vote? why did some vote against themselves? why did they vote for the anti- hugo chavez candidate that

would destroy el of this? i talked about the battle. i will not repeat it here. i talked quite a bit about it. 18,000 indigenous members led by the spanish, 18,000, and after the victories of the spanish army against the indigenous resistance armies, all of these indians were killed. those that survived were enslaved. this is the effect. let's find the reasons why we saw a drop in election support. but let's not kid overwhelmed by s.c. of confusion. it is not the first time in this struggle that the revolution has faced difficulties. we had the electric grid war. how many countries would put up with that? when i -- i remember when i went

to one state, lights were turned out twice. there was a blackout. and when i landed i tried to find out what was going on. we were told there was sabotage. i went to another event. blackouts. we continued to seek electrical seven tosh and intentional blackouts. economic sabotage, a whole set of factors that comprised as a result of the most hotly contested election. and i would just say that to stand here with the pain that i still feel in my heart every morning i wake up and think about him. i need his voice, his guidance, his embrace, his company, his

serenity. you have to see what is like to be here. i am not complaining and then not going to complain. i am a warrior, a combatant, and i will continue moving forward. and i have total faith that this government will be a government of national resurrection and miracles advancing the revolution of economic political social growth. i am completely assured of that. i have no doubt that we will confront these difficulties. [applause] i have no doubt that we will confront these challenges today and the challenges tomorrow and the challenges in the past, and those who can guide this should,

it's ourselves. we have a national assembly. we have a majority that is an honest, solid assembly to ensure the stability of the nation. secondly or i would say maybe not secondly, but i would also say that we have a national armed force, cohesive with unified command, patriotic forces from the lowest debt to the admirals', patriotic forces that have declared that they are hugo chavez forces. this is an armed force of the 21st century. i would just like to recognize all of the officers, all of the personnels that participated, including the general commanders

of the army, navy, air force, and the national guard, the national will varian militia, all of the military leaders from throughout the region. the interval defense forces, all of these, you have to know what it is to be here in the forefront and to feel that flame as commander, that flame of commitment to the nation. the strength that we have with an armed force that is ready. as a colleague said yesterday, he said, well, i would just like to announce here, comrades, new tasks are going to be assumed by the bulgarian armed forces so that they can join into the social and economic development. new paths and tasks to be assumed. we are going to implement many

of the ideas that he had launched. we see the discipline, the training, but of moral force and the moral support by the people. let's make this a six year time of economic and social prosperity and ethical success. i know that i can rely on the national bulgarian forces to go into the neighborhoods, for example. the major housing initiatives. we have already provided 1,603,000 dwellings. we are going to go up to 380,000 dwellings. we are going toward 3 million. a working group meeting proposed this, and i approved it. we're going to implement this. we are going to regain the try collar neighborhood initiative

to try to regain our neighborhoods, to regain those simple dwellings where people live, people who love their neighborhoods, people who are proud of where they live. rare going to go to these neighborhoods with the initiative to try to improve these areas to build, for example, bathrooms for the homes of these people these families will grow so that it becomes neighborhoods with full-service is, with everything that they need as these neighborhoods are beautiful and livable. we are going to complete the greater venezuelan housing initiative with the powerful plan with a tricolor initiative. these are ideas that we need to revitalize. additionally, i think we are going to go way beyond the

3 million homes marked. we needed. this is a strong country that has evolved. twenty-three governors. i call on all of them to work with me. i am going to call on the federal council, and i want to see all 23 governors. if they don't recognize the central government, what do i do? we must respect one another based upon the constitution. we have to. out of the 23, we have 20 or patriots, men, women. this is a major valued, 20 governors. they're all here.

[applause] the entire country. i said. we have the assemblies, the armed forces, governors, and the venezuelan people organized in a community organization, the patriotic spirit, all of this is -- our strengths are reflected and we have the political testament of the giants, the political testament of this giant who explains what it is

and how it has to be done. we have a powerful cultural artistic movement, and i extend my greetings to poets, singers, painters, singers of venezuelan music, the rebel music, all kinds of music, salsa. there are those who might confuse the possible lead. i do not. a room of with a tango. i don't confuse those two. i know how to play. i know all of those. i know how to dance to those musics. that is why i have called on the people to regrow this popular culture without exclusion. let's join together in the spirit of love.

i was very surprised to see a group of artists who suddenly, when they came in and we got to know them, we realize that they had a -- they had a spirit of soul. july slid them? no. even those that voted against us, come and. those that play, the pilots, the theater actors, movie actors, tv actors. come in with your song. here we have two beautiful children. the intolerance is to such an extent that these children who are beloved in this country, they say this. very humble with realization that they are humble children, the children of the nation, and all of you.

[applause] and a campaign of intolerance through twitter in salting children. my god, who could do that? who could have that in their soul to say such ugly things because they sang a song. they're going to sing this song so that our guest will hear you. what a beautiful song that these children sang. and they were inspired by commander in chavez. he lives on is the name of the song. i call on all of you and say, the strength of our nation. i want to lead a miracle government. i want to, on behalf of commander hugo chavez, reflect that spirit of love, a revolution within a revolution, several revolutions that i want to have so that this country becomes energized for the future

, even more democratized to build a stable democracy based on equality. i want to thank the vice president's and the president's and the minister's of the government of president hugo chavez for their loyalty, for their love, sacrifice, selflessness. i asked our round of applause for each one of these committee apostles that have come out. even though they are in pain they have supported that legacy. they have handed me a letter on their own initiative, and they have placed their positions at our disposal to facilitate any renewal that i need to do. i think you as the spirit of brotherhood. i am sure that if anyone of you

has to move on to a new trench in front, you will do it with enthusiasm and love. i am sure of that. thank you. we have been criticized for being inefficient. criticism. the commander told me. we brought in the video. we're not calling ted extend this further. tonight we can see that. you remember we had several events with the government. he said efficiency or nothing. and i created and i called through this initiative. i called on the country, the first revolution, the revolution

of socialist efficiency, to change everything, to combat bureaucracy, corruption. [applause] to combat backwardness. the culture of backwardness. [applause] the struggle, this is the first revolution that i have caused, and that is why i have created -- i have given it the name, efficiency or nothing. it has these components. i will add a third one now. the first one is the mike remissions that we will explain as we begin to implement them so that you can see the impact of

these might remissions. i have already told the workers. we are going to have a president , a workers' president in the permanent assembly listening to the criticism, assuming decisions with the people. here i have my comrades, the president of the metro workers union. i have known him since childhood in the -- in many of the garages of the metro system. i knew him when he was young, and here he is. he was skinny at that time. he is still robust and his ideas. the micro missions that are the creation of commander hugo chavez, how much effort did is required to understand the ideas behind this. the micro nations to change everything with the support of

professionals, experts in order to transform. a very clear missions. the socialist economy, direction, we have the proper administration, the proper management, the proper direction so that the industrial process these, successfully completed. we need to continue to produce food, iron in order to build dwellings, highways, be clear on our objectives and what we need to do to properly administer, invest, manage and lead that management process, as we say, or as it is stated in the capitalist policies. we have created a special anti-corruption unit created by commander hugo chavez.

the last time i saw him on february 22nd he told me -- he told all of us, we can't go anywhere if we don't have that research and investigation capability. we must stamp out corruption calcifies, disguise, and we have to be firm, come back. and i call on the people to come back and come back. as for your support the government of them, i was here as speaker of the national assembly for a year-and-a-half in 2005 and 2006. and we collectively created, and was up to me as speaker to create the parliament. it had a positive impact. now we have the legislature of the people. we need to reinvigorate this. i am not creating the government

. i go on my bus, and all the ministers that travel around the country to see the problems and to cut those heads of indolence, of corruption, to adjust government plans, to make them more reflective of reality so that health care, education, food, the economy, works appropriately, locally within the state and municipalities. and that is why it is essential that the -- we rely on the support of the governors who, of course, bring in their criticisms, their opinion, and rightly so, but secondly, secondly -- and this is what i call it -- the revolution of security, peace, justice. that is a major revolution that is to be launched to build a

safe country. 80 percent of people surveyed say that their main concern is what? what they call crime or lack of security. that is something found throughout most of latin america . the messes that we have used, as you are aware, has helped, but we still need to make a major stride. we know that commander john does founded the national security university. a university to train police officers, police officers graduate from there, national bavarian police. recreated the people's guard under commander hugo chavez. we saw a reinforcement of the national guard, but we have to continue to work in a 2-fisted approach. on the one hand we have a movement for peace. peace, justice from the

neighborhoods, the communities. we must -- we have responded positively. young people that are in a violent gangs or groups have now provided a positive response. all right. let's move forward. let's get these people to work. let's have them and over their weapons. let's have them become respectful of their neighbors and human life. with one hand we will build a new reality, new values. to reject the culture of arms, weapons command and negativism. with the other hand we will strengthen justice, the authorities. we need to have the presence of the national guard, the people's guard, the police on the street. the need to be able to communicate and have a problem without sabotaging anything. so we will work toward this revolution. similarly during the next few hours i'm going to make a few announcements related to this

subject. and i am talking about the national electrical mission. on monday i am going to declare the electrical grid as a national security service. we are going to clean it, sweep it clean of sabotage, protect the electrical system. it is a service, the power sector. and i ask for the support of all of the workers. the armed forces, governors, mayors, the representatives to make changes to the legislation that need to be made. the power is a sacred service. we don't know a single country

that has elections in processes where the election processes seven just and electrical services are disrupted. people are upset to the point of violent outbreaks. similarly, as we said, there were countryman, we will reinforce the social revolution. the major revolution to build socialism. we will strengthen the revolution. we will revise, adapt and tailored to the times. i called those responsible. all of these missions and those that arose during the process, the housing initiative, the

mothers of the neighborhoods. you're going to look at all of these initiatives. i am going to talk to those responsible for launching the participants, beneficiaries, revisit. the objective of this social revolution is that by 2019 we will have zero poverty, and we can achieve that. zero poverty and extreme poverty in venezuela by 2019. [applause] and i call -- by : the industrial sectors, as commander hugo chavez said, without a doubt we are facing a transition

moving toward socialism. that is our project. we are convinced that only through socialism we can overcome inequalities, the misery of the poor, extreme poverty, to live as human beings, to live with them the kingdom of christ here on earth. we are convinced of that. more than ever capitalism is the ceiling where the demands and the cause of society balance. if we do not go beyond capitalism we will hit the ceiling and bounce back into a whole. that is our belief. our debate of ideas within our country and throughout the world. it is a free debate where we in latin america and caribbean take on the best. we take from everything. ..

we have taken on things trivial this causes from porta sans and honduras. i convey my warm greetings to president lobo and honduras. we both embrace you.

the ascender is embrace one another affectionately. how many have we seen after the coup we tried to get a several times client how many lessons did we learn where they sandino found was located. we take from latin american examples because that revolution is the new latin american and caribbean independence movements, only together can we consolidate tours the future a great country which societies that are cultured, educated, firebrand and happy that can join the modern multipolar world, respected as their own separate lock. the 19th century was the century of division.

the 20th century was the century of domination, imperial domination. the 21st century is the century of brotherhood and unity in latin america and the caribbean. the president said yesterday, who imagined the end of the 21st century, hopefully we will have a century without hegemony, without imperialism, where the break countries can live and cooperate, emanate the threat of nuclear war and here we come they are greetings to ambassador from korea. they want peace for mankind at the korean finance. hopefully eliminate nuclear weapons between people. recall on our brothers and fellow citizens than those revolution, a revolution of the

economic industrial revolution, which is a core, that that for a social stability as well as political stability. the nation's stability based on the economy. how often have we faced acts of sabotage, disruption of supplies, planned sabotage on prices all the time has come to overcome the negative phenomenon of economic warfare. i extend to work together as the discussion went with business community yesterday. if you want to work, we have the resources to do it. we have the resources to support you come to bring you board. let's create economic areas inspired by commander chavez. we have studied experiences throughout the world such as

verdana in shanghai and china. we have models we are now finishing up so they can attract public, private, international investment to promote industry and our countries with the greatest tactical flexibility possible, with the greatest strategic vision, with the greatest economic vision. we need to build an economic government. when he took cover the economy. to do that, we need to have the workers who are the major producers of wealth. the plan for producing includes working with the business community, small, medium large, international business. how many investors from brazil, argentina? how many investors do we have to

invest gain in the orinoco oil and initiative. we need to continue strengthening our economic -- powerful economic base within our country. among these priorities we have established, i call upon the revolution of the people to build the socialist way of life. the socialist way of life, all of this is interconnected. the socialist way of life is the building of community councils. europeanized entities, the workers, the various trade associations, the socialist way

of life and putting together a spirit of equality, solidarity, respect for the lives of everyone to share, to cooperate, to work together, to build a nation, to train, to educate a cultured people and have a society that is critical. we've always supported with our commander chavez and the political training of our people to create a critical, self-critical political culture. let's not allow our waters to become stagnant, otherwise you have no revolution. you have to just sit and wait for the and. that is why i call on a revolution of the people to build the socialist way of life, without the people it is not

going to be done. we need to show how socialism, the spirit of equality as possible. how come and live together as human beings and that's why a call in the revolution. we need to take anonymous fours, do everything that is to be done to wreck if i witnessed the wreck site. we have the maturity that we are mature. it's not some campaign slogan. we have men and women who are mature. sometimes children are more mature than anyone else because they had a pure soul and see the brightness of the future of this country. i am sure, fellow countryman,

that this -- that i have received and the symbols of the liberators, the metals of the liberators i have received because you called on me and elected me as president as we complied with our oath, they match our oath with commander seanez and we will continue to meet that in this -- i wear here, when i take it off, and i don't know when that will be. what i do know is if i lose this -- come it will be an election as established by the constitution. as the giants once dreamed, the day i lose this -- come it will

be to place it on a woman or a man who is a showpiece for. i am the first workers president and his jury of this country. up until now was never present from the working-class. we had a bulgarian revolutionary socialist president for the first time that hugo chavez. that is why i hope to carry forth these values with dignity and to turn into reality the trains of hugo chavez three s., the dreams of a nation that is secure and that peace. thank you, fellow countrymen. i assume occurs, love and desire for peace. thank you very much. independent comes socialist nation. always until we achieve it very, seanez lives, seanez lives.

thank you so much, my fellow countrymen.

>> i tell my kids, work, if two cars fall upon one has a stranger and the other has dick cheney, you get in the car with

a stranger. >> if you took all the money republicans spent trying to stop health care and the many democrats have spent trying to get health care, we have had health care. it's amazing to be in washington d.c. without this amazing building and here we are at the hilton. >> is hard to be funny with the president of united states but cannot you and somehow day in and day out, joe biden manages to do it. >> one of the problems of the judges appointed public errors is the public defender's job is reliant upon their approval and judges are judged on their

efficiency off and, how fast they process cases? how quickly do they get through the docket? they are going to want a public defender that goes along and gets along. that is a real challenge. in new orleans for a long time, the system was one public defender was assigned to one courtroom in the same judge. they were always arguing before the same judge. the problem with that as they were then trading client to the way, like okay, my private paying clients come if we spend a little time and take his case to trial, i will persuade this client to plead guilty. there was this sort of trade-off going like you cash in your favors and it really made for a very corrupt system down there.

richard richard cordray was responding to questions to republicans on the senate aging committee. this recently renominated to the good bureau. this is an hour and 40 minutes. >> good morning. i called this hearing to order. we have reviewed the cfpb semi annual report and are here today to conduct regular oversight of

the cfpb. this includes making sure the agency continues to fulfill it mission of protecting consumers and empowering them to make responsible financial decisions, promoting competition and industry and ensuring how access to financial services for all americans. director cordray, welcome back to the committee. i know you share my commitment to transparency and accountability. in fact, this is a 32nd time a cfpb official has appeared before congress in just over two years. in your 13th appearance. brad la salle, your engagement was consumers and industry representatives as has been

widely praised. the richard cordray has made significant progress in protecting tumors including students, servicemembers and other americans. for example, the cfpb has developed a number of tools including that will help students make the best races as they pursue these regimes. it is $445 million. it is in the hands of armed donors and the economy. earlier, the richard cordray have stricken mortgage stange is an includes the ability to bp provision, which requires one

nurse to make a good-faith effort to determine where a borrower can make his or her payments. these roles have been generally well received by consumer and industry alike pacificare undertook and the rules. however, we must ensure these rules do not have impact on underserved areas, including world areas. i look forward to hearing from director cordray at how this will impact world lending and is an important issue. europe make comments about reducing regulatory burden on community banks communions. i continue to be interested to

the plan to rule straight the right balance protecting consumers while addressing legitimate concerns smaller institutions may have feared you through the day in and day out that you are well-qualified for your position. even my colleagues across the concede this point. i hope we can provide the market for search and it needs in the consumers by confirming you quickly. thank you for your service and i look forward to our ongoing work with you. with that, i was trying to ranking crapo. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you mr. cordray for being with us today. the semiannual briefing at a potential bureau is important to gain insight into what the agency is doing.

as i've consistently stated in past hearings, we have concerns with the structural nature of the agency. we continue to seek a change to report that structure that is essential the agency be a part of the perp patients process and the prudential banking regulator should i be fumbled and put into the bureau's action for those actions affect safety and soundness. with regard to the cfpb last elected and has not changed. recently officials have pointed out they've testified in the past few years. we here direct from agency officials and it does not facilitate the net discussion of a specific issue i'm concerned we need. last week blumberg ran a lengthy

article citing the richard cordray has allocated $20 million for collecting and tracking customer credit card and spending habits for 10 million americans. the size of the data collection and the money being spent at the agency or a cause of concern for me. it should be for those americans who credit cards, checking accounts are being sent month fully. last month i specifically asked the agency about the collection, but the responses downplayed nature and extent. guess how many accounts the cfpb is monitored and declined to provide the information. good night for the price is 10 million accounts and perhaps even more. the lack of candor and transparency with the agency is doing and how it intends to use his data is struggling. the was done with a mission to watch out for american consumers, not to watch them.

given the inspector general has 30 identified data security issues, how can the consumer be assured the information is indeed safe? with regard to regulatory role, the bureau has issued numerous remaking resulting in significant cumulative burden for effective institutions, especially smaller community banks that have just a handful of employees. in january alone, the bureau finalized 2500 pages of new rules related to mortgages through seven different rulemaking. i am concerned without cost-benefit analysis and input from crafty girls, well-intentioned rules could make consumer credit mark sensitive and less affordable. that is why two separate hearings last year i encouraged the cfpb to conduct a panel on the proposed mortgage proposal to try to minimize unintended

consequences. many community bankers now worn despite the many cuban exemptions for small institutions, they will no longer offer mortgages that fit the criteria, which will restrict ability to make the mortgage needs of communities they serve. another issue has been identified by the own cfp beat me to reveal clarify role of enforcement attorneys to attend supervisory expands. i look forward to hearing from you about how you plan to address the community patent concerns that the key web rule and implementing the overall recommendations. specifically like to hear how the bureau handles concerns as well as whether the was concerned about the effect to share presents the attorneys may have on the integrity of the examination process. i firmly believe that the structure of the agency were

changed, it would become more open and transparent in many issues would not need to be raised by members of congress. it's my hope that congress will move quickly to address and pass these reforms so that bureau can do what it was designed to do that is protect the american consumer. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator crapo. any other members who wish to make a brief opening statement? >> i want to remind my colleagues the record will be open for the next seven days for an opening statement and any other materials you would like to submit. mr. richard cordray is director of the consumer financial protection bureau, welcome back to the committee, director cordray. you may begin your testimony. >> ranking member crapo members of the committee, thank you for

inviting me to testify that the semiannual report of the consumer financial protection bureau. my colleagues and i are happy to testify before the congress and ranking member hope to have a chance to address issues you raise that required questioning him happy to do it. there are good answers to all of those issues that you raise. born not of the worst crisis, the consumer was the nation's first federal agency whose sole focus is protect consumers in the marketplace. very dedicated to improving lives of everyday americans in restoring trust in consumer financial markets. the semiannual report we discuss about his work over the last six months of 2012. the report illustrates the ways we are using the tools congress provided us to empower consumers and provide a fair transparent and competitive marketplace for consumer finance. we've taken steps to improve working rockets, particularly those in which consumers cannot choose service providers.

one is that collection. concerned about systemwide problems that pose, but gained authority to supervise debt collectors correctly. debt collectors account for 60% of the industry receipts in the market. bad actors are a detriment to consumers and every collector that operates lawfully. we expanded our supervision program to include the companies with a profound impact on people's lives. previously companies are not subject to supervision and often struggle to get resolved. in addition to begin handling can do my complaints about credit reporting issues. all of which will open a clear window into the operations of these companies. as a result the can evaluate whether laws are followed throughout the process credit origination to debt collection.

identifying problems, we are working to minimize sumer harm. report encompasses the first enforcement actions against credit card companies that deceived and misled consumers and in some cases targeted economically vulnerable consumers with low credit scores and limit peer were able to secure $425 million in relief for 6 million consumers and impose penalties to deter such activity in the future. these will serve as a warning signal for anyone who's asked the prophet by deceiving and misleading consumers. in the second half of 2012 but tackled issues in the market for private student loan debt which currently totals $150 billion outstanding. studies details struggles to recent graduates experience in the market. we made recommendations to congress on commonsense reforms to ensure the practices of the

past are not repeated. the work on discussing today is merely a snapshot of efforts on behalf of consumers. for also addressing consumer complaints on financial products and services chortling 130,000 today. we the top disney markets regulation banning irresponsible lending practices to bring about the financial crisis. ability to repay rule follows the simple principle the vendor should offer consumer mortgages they can actually afford to pay back. we've actively connected to reach an issue older american comes to an end, service members and others in what we heard is gutted the direction of our work. each day we take another step in pursuit of our vision to create a financial marketplace or customer see prices and risk up front anything the product comparisons and which no one can build a business model around unlawful practices and works well for individual consumers

was also a business is in the economy a whole. we will continue to persist in the work and we appreciate your oversight. as always, i'd be glad to answer your questions. thank you. >> thank you very much for your testimony. as we begin questions, i will ask the clerk to put five minutes on the clock for each member. director cordray and the servicing role and q. admiral, you provide allowances for rural areas and community bags. i've heard from constituents a threshold for real my name on the net lending by small banks. how will those rules impact funding for rural or underserved areas and what have you done to address these concerns? more specifically, how did you

select a 5000 long threshold to funding small servicers? >> thank you, mr. chairman. one of the things that requires us to do with every new regulation, in addition to assessing cost and benefit is to assess and packs on smaller providers and also rural areas. ..

>> as a get more after finalization. with the servicing roguery propose the exemption for smaller servicers very few foreclosures soar a high touch customer model that we want to encourage as a model to the larger services. we proposed an exemption for those that serviced 1,000 loans or fewer after

receiving comments and we had to brave the small business review panel as senator crapaud mentioned in real expanded that to those whose service up to 5,000 mortgages. that is 98 percent of the smaller providers that are exempt. we are trying to be careful and sensitive not the one size fits all approach so that some lenders are of interest to congress in the market and consumers. >> director condray as you know, the upstanding student loan debt now exceeds $1 trillion. cfpb you recently asked how to make student loan repayment more affordable within zero plan to do with

regard to student attending a and would you view is the biggest risks of the market? >> several things and for the ombudsman of students it is the position congress created cover several things. first of all, for those who do make the decision whether to go to college and how to pay for higher education we have created new tools like the shopping sheet that is a broader paying for college module has rollout the guidance counselors, teachers, parents and young people across the country right now as they begin to make these financial decisions. second, we put out a rule to supervise students lowe's servicers many who have suffered some of the same problems mortgage servicers

had suffered as we hear from them around the country we will directly examined them to make sure they are compliant with the law. on the proposal haag -- with thoughts and ideas from the public what could be done about the existing student loan program and is slowing down with housing purchases we have had over 28,000 comments submitted on that proposal and working with the number of other entities like treasury and parts of the government and the department of education to help address this problem it is a work in progress.

>> i want to talk about the data collection issue as it appears it collects data on at least 10 million americans congress allow consumers to opt out having their personal information shared with third parties shouldn't consumers be given the opportunity to opt out from having their financial information shared with federal government as the cfpb collection efforts? >> figure for the question. the story that i read as well i think misunderstood the number of things about what the bureau is doing. first of all, big data och is the cutting edge of analysis right now all of every field dealing with the analytics in this country. i am, a big bank in every

company dealing with the public cringing as much data as they can i have seen figures 90% of the data created in the last two years that exists in the world. is in the private sector the way of the world the big banks know more about you than you know, about yourself. the notion that the regulators would not keep up with them to do our job to oversee them would be quite misguided. but first i want to stress this data is not personal identifiable information so the notion may track consumers or somehow invade privacy is wrong. many data sources we access our commercial data sources that many entities are buying and selling the data

to analyze what it shows about the market's, that goes to our credit card data which is a source used by other regulators as well as companies themselves. the database we put together is all about having the dated to do the things that congress requires us to do. to do careful cost benefit analysis. and frankly we need to develop the national mortgage database and that is better in the future. congress asked us to write reports of the carjacking and the effects of it. you cannot write a report like that without it being meaningful unless we can analyze the data to see what the consequences have been.

>> let's talk about the anonymity first. from the bloomberg article my understanding is cfpb has given different contracts to different entities to collect and store this enormous amount of data the agency is collecting. even if not personally identifiable to the agency is it possible for the cfpb to hire contractors to dig in and get the information? >> i don't know if that is possible or not. i am sure it would be but that is not what we're doing or would be doing. we have no interest how did you phrase it?

watching consumers. we do have an interest in understanding how financial products and services are affecting consumers and to do the cost benefit analysis as rewrite the rules. we have an interest to make sure the studies and reports congress is asking us to do helps to inform policy decisions that are on sound ground we could see over time if the objectives you try to achieve are achieved. that is the worst we are doing. >> and tristan the collection of data is collecting at phenomenal rates and many americans are concerned about that as well and the notion government needs to keep up is i understand your point* to regulate. but it seems to me there is a huge issue whether the federal government ship now be getting into the data

collection and you talk about. my time is up but i will come back to this to discuss further. >> thank you, mr. chairman and for your testimony in leadership of the cfpb. first, specifically about the complaints database and can you share a little bit, i believe there are no names attached to it and it is anonymous but it gives everyone a sense of what consumers are most concerned about. if that is correct can you confirm it is synonymous? and water the top three year for things that you can see with that database? >> the database of consumer complaints which is something that people were gradually getting used to is

analogous to what has been done over 40 years by that the national highway traffic safety administration leading to improvements of auto safety in now the auto companies embrace it although they did not have first. it is analogous to that consumer products safety commission is doing with lead in toys and other types of things we were not aware of 20 years ago but are better off now to know about to protect our children. similarly, what we're doing is as we receive complaints complaints, we scrub them and remove any duplicates duplicates, verify there is a customer relationship, we do anatomize that data it does not identify personal identify the information but i think it would bring some

agency into disrepute didn't if there is a growing amount of information that the yield at this point* with the database when we brought in to it we had this 90,000 complaints they are added to a by data och -- day by day now. and united kingdom they have been publishing complaints data for years and over there most recent six months period they have 3.4 million complaints. >> what are the three year for top issues or insights come from the database? >> first of all, your office is telling us the same thing with the increase you get from constituents. concern of mortgage servicing and consumer harm. credit-card complaints is somewhat surprising because

i remember before the card act committed was a controversial area for the public but complaints are down i believe and shows better work by the companies is more careful attention and our report will show there is progress made there. interesting one for us is credit reporting complaints. people are not aware how significant effect their credit reports have but those that are have found a variety of fares, having trouble getting those corrected in may start to hear about that as to take complaints earlier this year. this is information that is illuminating to us rethink it is eliminating two companies into the public has a right to to know this

information to make assessments accordingly. it is good all-around and we should have more information rather than less. >> since you mentioned with it significant consumer concern i see that through that case work calls it that we get a as of the issues that have been raised with the discretion to make sure there is clear communication and the dual track which still exists to a degree but any insight with the aspect of mortgage servicing that are still troubling to consumers? >> senator, i think it is frustrating to me and i'm sure to you and your colleagues it is still the case, maybe less so in some servicers have improved and some have yet to approve but

some fundamental tackling lost paperwork not getting a single point* of contact. but the dual tracking is a great concern. the notion somebody is working with you with a lefty and to get the loan modified on the right and proceeding with a foreclosure that is very aggravating and with the new rules we devise going into effect in january will make a significant difference in this respect across the entire market with banks and nonbanks that has never before been the case. we've met face-to-face with top executives from all large top dozen servicers to let them know this was coming and the importance and to take it seriously and not to wait to. i would hope over time your offices and our bureau war

-- will hear less but right now they are very significant. >> let me follow up on st. -- senator gregg those collections about data collection. weird you go to get the data? >> i would focus on three different areas, a credit-card data which is critical to do things like prepare the card at steady. >> do you go to visa or mastercard? >> typically a different answer for different categories and a reading from knows that my staff prepared, we have typically been collecting this through a known collector of data used by any number of institutions and other regulators so we're

following well plowed ground to assess the data. >> so they go to lisa or mastercard? >> or the issuers of saul's like jpmorgan chase over bankamerica or wells fargo. >> so there are two others. where else would you go? >> the other two is the national mortgage database we will create together with the fhfa is essential because as we realize it is not as good as it should be. there are holes so it is not representative of the entire market. that made it challenging as we went to write the rules and we did a pause on the

rule where we went and got more data from shfa that were very cooperative with us to help us with that and then we put out for more comments because we would be using new data that had not surfaced before to make sure the process was complete. but that data is gathered over time in realtime on mortgages going forward to provide a more representative sample of what the market is doing so we see the problems in realtime which we could not do very well over the last decade that led to the crisis. the third court categories of credit records and we has been buying the data from the same source the fed of new york has been buying from. they use that data for a number of years to published reports, a quarterly report

of household debt and credit. so we follow there lead in terms of good data on credit reporting to have the insight to protect consumers whether laws are being followed and the effect of consumers and different practices. >> individual payment, performance, would never come up with ever, is the basis upon which naked data is created obviously. so somehow, someway, the government gets control of information how people pay mortgage or their credit card bill or whatever. >> but this is in the important difference to stress. if by that you mean we give permission whether richard teeeighteen is paying his

mortgage and when and how, we year getting information about consumers and how the mortgage performs over time. i do not have access to data about you or myself. but you have to have data about consumers to understand what is going on in the marketplace. you want us to write rules with cost-benefit is but if we do have data or information of the impact we cannot do that, we cannot do our job and you would be dissatisfied with us and rightly so. >> by a matter of time that may be too many people this will sound downright creepy. it is. i just think people will be bothered by the fact there is a federal agency collecting data on the

behavior of people like you and me and everybody else to pay off the mortgage and credit-card bills every month. is an uncomfortable situation for your agencies. >> if people want to see it follows then individually and invading there privacy and to there personal lives, that is not what it is. we have to have information what goes on in the markets of an aggregate of consumer benefit. if you don't have any information to do this work then basically you are and know nothing and cannot do the work can write the would be critical if we just operated on speculation and did not make the effort to ground the policy judgments as is widely available and

anatomize very importantly importantly, an itemized. >>. >> let me raise an issue that you're looking after the military there are military personnel who cannot get housing they apply and it takes months and the list reaches them in the meantime there in the rental contract and in some states there is as severe penalty for breaking that contract. other states actually have state laws that say than the landlord cannot impose a penalty. how were you trying to do with this? this is a serious issue for many personnel. >> i would say there are

several different housing issues for service members active duty and their families and the reservists we have been countered and our director has been around the country to lew talk to am brought back accounts. one was the permanent change of station orders that i know you are familiar with the work with the department of defense and others to address the department of treasury to qualify that as a hardship. what you are raising is another great example there could be another consumer problem of tenants who are renting to be affected by some of these problems and a great example is when they dealt with the fact they could be ousted from the place they are living although the tenant may not

know nothing it comes without warning they find there belongings on the street. or the military in this instance can do with changes station orders or trying to improve housing for a lesser cost. if congress will look at that issue we would be happy to supply the experience we have seen from around the country by it is another outstanding example of consumer issues. and then they are sure to endure aggravated by the situation of service members who have limited choice and have to obey orders to go where they are told and supposed to be there. >> we appreciate working with you. my sense is support for both sides it has an impact on

personnel to move from expensive rental quarters to housing and sometimes it is a complete change of station to be a penalty and i would like to work with you on this. >> click at the recent semi a dual report from the look loan mortgage modifications we spent of few sessions to talk about this about the modification now we found recently even some of the people were owed checks, they bounced. border you seeing and what you can do to help the modification issue? >> has congress directed us to do we have adopted new

rules under comprehensive for the mortgage servicing market in effect in jaggery and the companies are already at work implementing this now. this is no surprise. these problems have been surfaced and publicized for years. they are common across the industry yet growing because they affect individuals bleeding too bad results results, lead to people losing there homes, the most precious thing they possess and upset financially. we're also examining mortgage servicers on site to look at how they comply with the law. summer during a decent job many have problems that will require corrections and compliance and enforcement action as needed but we are

in a position with the new bureau that did not exist before to examine the institution directly to ensure they comply with the new regulation to address the scope of the problem and enforce the law as needed to bring them into shape which is long overdue. >> going forward you have a much better process. we have a whole category of americans still caught up in the old system. let me ask a question not rhetorical you were not involved with the reserve with the settlement to propose to modify mortgages than compensate people for illegal foreclosures. >> we were not involved. as that unfolded i started

as the attorney general in ohio and we did siva problems of the robo signing i joined the bureau we have a transition period not yet independent but our role in this calling for verge, not looking backward but everybody to is caught up in the situation as soon as they take effect are governed it doesn't matter it was three or four or five years ago. the examinations that are in process right now are examining the problems right now. other processes that look back for several years ago is a different issue but for us the present in the future is the agenda congress has given us will be aggressive to fix the problem. also thank you for the efforts you make plastics

with the changes of the military lending act and working with multiple agencies and the department of defense we will implement those changes in the law in the manner of which congress intended. >> senator shelby? >> mr. condray, good morning. financial stability oversight council director is a member was given authority to eliminate market expectations by any american financial firms to be available. do you agree as a member of that you have a responsibility to these discussions to help identify threats to our financial system?